After Shep Smith of Fox News decided to minimize the growing outrage over the 2010 Uranium One deal in which both Russia and the Clinton Foundation emerged enriched, the internet lit up with explanations of how Smith got it wrong.

In 2010, the Obama administration approved a deal that allowed the giant Russian firm, Uranium One, to buy a Canadian company that controlled a portion of America’s uranium supply.

Recent revelations have shown that former President Bill Clinton wanted to meet with Uranium One officials during a 2010 trip to Moscow. The Hill reported that Clinton was set to collect a $500,000 speaking fee.

Advertisement – story continues below

Russia also reportedly donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation from 2009 to 2013 while Clinton was serving as secretary of state.

The core argument Smith made was that although Hillary Clinton was secretary of state at the time of the deal, it was not her decision alone.

DAILY

The Western Journal Daily Email

Breaking news updates and daily headlines from a news source you can trust.

Thanks For Subscribing!

In his rebuttal, Shapiro relied in part on an April 2015 report from The New York Times that thoroughly explained the Uranium One deal.

Advertisement – story continues below

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one,” the report wrote.

The Times report also showed that the Clintons’ involvement came long before Clinton reached the State Department.

The piece noted that in 2005, former President Bill Clinton made a visit to Kazakhstan along with Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra. The former president spoke in favor of President Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Shortly after, Giustra’s firm, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a uranium deal with Kazakhstan.

In 2007, UrAsia Energy merged with Uranium One, and Giustra sold his stake in the company, although it was still controlled by his shareholders.

Shaprio noted that the report made it clear that Ian Telfer, who became the chair of Uranium One, was also a multi-million-dollar donor to the Clinton Foundation.

Advertisement – story continues below

The possible link between Bill Clinton’s big payday and the Uranium One deal was outed by the Times in 2015.

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock,” the Times reported.

All of that evidence, Shapiro wrote, goes against Smith’s contention that the Clintons and the Uranium One deal were in separate orbits.

“So no, it’s not at all unclear that the Clintons were unrelated to Uranium One. And it’s not unclear that they’d have no interest in pushing Uranium One — Giustra still had an interest in maintaining faith with his former shareholders, and the Clintons had intervened in the past to help out the company beyond Giustra’s involvement. That doesn’t mean that Hillary signed off on the Uranium One sale. But to downplay the sale itself or the Clintons’ interest in it would neglect facts in evidence,” he wrote.

Advertisement – story continues below

During his Tuesday rant, Smith contended that the Clinton State Department “had no power to approve or veto that transaction.”

“The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale. She did not,” Smith said.

“A committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the U.S. to Russia,” he said.

He also said that most of the money donated to the Clinton Foundation came from a man named Frank Giustra, who was no longer involved with the company at the time of the sale.